I see that Rau isn't teaching Contracts next year---you guys really dodged the bullet. I assume they can't fire him completely, but not letting him loose on 1Ls is a start---the new Dean must be learning quickly.

I didn't have anderson, but he and Robertson wrote their torts casebook together and teach in a similar fashion. The exams are almost identical in terms of style. LEARN THE CIVIL PROCEDURE for each case. It was emphasized a little on Roberstson's exam, but I heard it was a pretty big part of Anderson's multiple choice.

I had Anderson for Torts. Procedure wasn't a big deal with his exam, at least when I had him. It was policy that was a big deal, especially on his essay question. Also, he has many minority jurisdiction rules of law on his exam, but he never emphasized these in class. His multiple choice is very tricky. Pay attention to those minority jurisdiction holdings.

And please make sure that you prepare for every class. He does not call on you according to seating chart or alphabetical order. It's totally random. And he will make you look awfully silly and stupid if you are not ready. And your answers better be on point or he may ridicule you some more. I've seen it happen to some of my classmates with my own eyes and it was not a pretty site.

That being said, he's a very fair guy and became one of my favorite professors. You just have to work hard to get to know him because he is very intimidating at first.

I'm considering UT as a wild card in my admissions. I don't have any ties there whatsoever (no family, friends, nor previous residence/employment/schooling....). But I like that TX is an economically thriving state and has some nice big cities.

I'm considering UT as a wild card in my admissions. I don't have any ties there whatsoever (no family, friends, nor previous residence/employment/schooling....). But I like that TX is an economically thriving state and has some nice big cities.

Compared to other top law school environments, the cost of living in Texas is extremely low. I've lived in Texas all of my life except for when I attended my undergrad. So I can't give you any specifics as to how low it is, but it is low. It's not like Alabama or Mississippi low, but it is pretty low.

And no, I did not go to undergrad in Alabama or Mississippi. It was somewhere up north.

The Texas legal market is not nearly as saturated as other legal markets. I wish people would understand that Texas is not the same as Boston or Chicago.

No other school is given priority over UT Law grads with decent grades in Texas except for maybe Harvard grads. So while it is more difficult to go out of state with a UT Law degree ITE, the same cannot be said in Texas. Texas is our backyard. The only thing that restricts Texas grads is that it is a big school and there are not enough biglaw jobs to go around in our state and the fact that most students here are Texas residents and want to stay home after law school come hell or high water because the cost of living is so cheap.

Your question is a fair question, though. It really depends on whether you really want to be a lawyer or not, how much do you like the work.

There's always risk to going to even great law schools. If you do poorly, you are pretty much screwed. The great thing about UT, if you are a state resident, is that it is possible to keep your debt in check. This creates more options for employment.

If you are out of state, I think the tuition is pretty crazy. It's gone up so much just since I graduated. And I graduated in 07. I don't think I would do it for 50 grand in tuition a year. So the more I think about it, your question was very fair.

The Texas legal market is not nearly as saturated as other legal markets. I wish people would understand that Texas is not the same as Boston or Chicago.

No other school is given priority over UT Law grads with decent grades in Texas except for maybe Harvard grads. So while it is more difficult to go out of state with a UT Law degree ITE, the same cannot be said in Texas. Texas is our backyard. The only thing that restricts Texas grads is that it is a big school and there are not enough biglaw jobs to go around in our state and the fact that most students here are Texas residents and want to stay home after law school come hell or high water because the cost of living is so cheap.

The bolded comment really isn't true. Firms will choose plenty of T14 students with similar grades/class rank with Texas ties over a similar UT student. I've talked with people who've been on hiring committees for the big three that say they go deeper in the class at UVA then they do at UT. That said, I love UT and if it's cheaper than T14 options, then UT can make a lot of sense, especially if you want to work in Texas.

utlaw2007 wrote:The great thing about UT, if you are a state resident, is that it is possible to keep your debt in check.

Unfortunately, this is no longer true. Two-thirds of my tuition was in-state, and it makes my head swim when I think about how much debt I'm in. Even if you go all three years in-state, you're looking at more than $150K if you take out loans to pay the rent and eat. Tuition is out of control. I can't say I'd recommend UT in-state unless you get a substantial scholarship or biglaw hiring picks up considerably, even in the relative economic oasis that is Texas.

What would you consider a reasonable CoL/yr estimate? In-state tuition is great, but loans for CoL are even harder to swallow than loans directly for school. I'm looking at roughly $20k/yr in scholarship from UT.

txdude45 wrote:What would you consider a reasonable CoL/yr estimate? In-state tuition is great, but loans for CoL are even harder to swallow than loans directly for school. I'm looking at roughly $20k/yr in scholarship from UT.

What do you mean, harder to swallow? Unless you have a great deal of savings or already own a place in Austin, cost-of-living loans will be necessary. I've usually stuck to the position that you should max out your loans at first and then pay back or adjust down if you want. You don't want to be worried about grocery money while you're focused on your grades and on finding good employment.

Your actual cost of living will vary depending on how comfortable you want to be. During my 1L year, I paid less than $600 a month for rent for a decent place with a roommate, but now I pay a lot more because my priorities have changed. I don't think UT's estimates have been too high or too low.

By the way, I wouldn't hesitate to take the $20K-a-year scholarship. If you can get a degree of UT's caliber for less than $100K, that's a good deal. I personally wouldn't change anything about my decision to go to UT, but I know I overpaid, and my family and I will be feeling the pinch for years.

The Texas legal market is not nearly as saturated as other legal markets. I wish people would understand that Texas is not the same as Boston or Chicago.

No other school is given priority over UT Law grads with decent grades in Texas except for maybe Harvard grads. So while it is more difficult to go out of state with a UT Law degree ITE, the same cannot be said in Texas. Texas is our backyard. The only thing that restricts Texas grads is that it is a big school and there are not enough biglaw jobs to go around in our state and the fact that most students here are Texas residents and want to stay home after law school come hell or high water because the cost of living is so cheap.

The bolded comment really isn't true. Firms will choose plenty of T14 students with similar grades/class rank with Texas ties over a similar UT student. I've talked with people who've been on hiring committees for the big three that say they go deeper in the class at UVA then they do at UT. That said, I love UT and if it's cheaper than T14 options, then UT can make a lot of sense, especially if you want to work in Texas.

I think it really depends on the firm. There are some firms in Texas that pay biglaw market rate that have nothing but UT Law grads as associates. Some don't have a single T14 associate. The fact that firms may go lower in the class at another T14 doesn't necessarily mean that they value that law school's grads over UT Law grads. It could mean that they have to go deeper in the class at these other schools to find applicants that are willing to work in Texas. Texas firms don't always have to go that deep into UT's class because our school is so big. Not only is it big, but most everyone wants to stay in Texas. If a firm goes top 40% into UT's class versus top 55% at Chicago, that just means that going top 40% at UT means a HELL of a lot of applicants. So clearly, they can be more selective with UT Law grads. Why go top 50 when you have more applicants than you have space available that are top 35% from UT? Most big law firms in Texas that recruit nationally are more interested in having a diverse body of associates from different law schools.

But there are also a few biglaw firms that have nothing but UT Law grads. That doesn't sound like they are trying to attract T14 grads to me.

Can anyone speculate on what they think the dramatic cut in class size means for incoming UT students when it comes to biglaw hiring?

What I mean is: let's say for the sake of the argument that there used to be 400 UT students and 100 big law jobs. And again for the sake of the argument say that these 100 jobs were given to the top 100 kids in the class, so the top 25% (oversimplifications, I know, just bear with me).

Now, instead of there being 400 UT students there are 300. But there are still 100 big law jobs. Should we now assume that the top 33% of the class will get those jobs? Or, will firms hold tight to their (hypothetical) top 25% cut off and only 75 UT kids will get those jobs and the other 25 spots will be filled from other schools?

Hopefully that wasn't too confusing, I can try and clarify if need be. I'm just wondering if we should consider the cut in class size as removing the bottom of the class and it will be better for everyone or if the employment scores will roughly stay the same percentage wise (and yes I know what we are looking at on places like LST is from the worst year in recent history).

StylinNProfilin wrote:how are the employment prospects looking? Last number I saw was around 23% big law and 7% clerkships for the class of '11. Has this changed much for your class?

I'm hoping they'll look better, since the class of '11 had it pretty rough across the board. I can rely only on the vaguest anecdotal evidence (and I don't like to hang out with law students that much), but it seems like my class is doing OK. Most 3Ls I know on TLR and my journal seem to have hopped on the generic biglaw train, though my journal is known for being a biglaw feeder, especially for Texas firms. Maybe Richie knows more about the TLR folks. IP people and hard-core oil and gas people seem to be doing well. Public interest hopefuls are definitely having a difficult time, what with government freezes, foundation budgets shrinking, increased competition, and overall uncertainty about the legal market.

Any other 3Ls or 2Ls want to weigh in on the outlook for their respective classes?

BigZuck wrote:Can anyone speculate on what they think the dramatic cut in class size means for incoming UT students when it comes to biglaw hiring?

What I mean is: let's say for the sake of the argument that there used to be 400 UT students and 100 big law jobs. And again for the sake of the argument say that these 100 jobs were given to the top 100 kids in the class, so the top 25% (oversimplifications, I know, just bear with me).

Now, instead of there being 400 UT students there are 300. But there are still 100 big law jobs. Should we now assume that the top 33% of the class will get those jobs? Or, will firms hold tight to their (hypothetical) top 25% cut off and only 75 UT kids will get those jobs and the other 25 spots will be filled from other schools?

Hopefully that wasn't too confusing, I can try and clarify if need be. I'm just wondering if we should consider the cut in class size as removing the bottom of the class and it will be better for everyone or if the employment scores will roughly stay the same percentage wise (and yes I know what we are looking at on places like LST is from the worst year in recent history).

Don't get bogged down in this line of thinking. I doubt employers (firms, government agencies, public interest outfits) will lower their standards if the number of UT students shrinks. Put another way, if they don't like you, they won't hire you, regardless of how many classmates you have. Focus on your own prospects instead of a statistical hypothesis.

I'll bet you can count on a better chance at a good parking spot, though.

The Texas legal market is not nearly as saturated as other legal markets. I wish people would understand that Texas is not the same as Boston or Chicago.

No other school is given priority over UT Law grads with decent grades in Texas except for maybe Harvard grads. So while it is more difficult to go out of state with a UT Law degree ITE, the same cannot be said in Texas. Texas is our backyard. The only thing that restricts Texas grads is that it is a big school and there are not enough biglaw jobs to go around in our state and the fact that most students here are Texas residents and want to stay home after law school come hell or high water because the cost of living is so cheap.

The bolded comment really isn't true. Firms will choose plenty of T14 students with similar grades/class rank with Texas ties over a similar UT student. I've talked with people who've been on hiring committees for the big three that say they go deeper in the class at UVA then they do at UT. That said, I love UT and if it's cheaper than T14 options, then UT can make a lot of sense, especially if you want to work in Texas.

I think it really depends on the firm. There are some firms in Texas that pay biglaw market rate that have nothing but UT Law grads as associates. Some don't have a single T14 associate. The fact that firms may go lower in the class at another T14 doesn't necessarily mean that they value that law school's grads over UT Law grads. It could mean that they have to go deeper in the class at these other schools to find applicants that are willing to work in Texas. Texas firms don't always have to go that deep into UT's class because our school is so big. Not only is it big, but most everyone wants to stay in Texas. If a firm goes top 40% into UT's class versus top 55% at Chicago, that just means that going top 40% at UT means a HELL of a lot of applicants. So clearly, they can be more selective with UT Law grads. Why go top 50 when you have more applicants than you have space available that are top 35% from UT? Most big law firms in Texas that recruit nationally are more interested in having a diverse body of associates from different law schools.

But there are also a few biglaw firms that have nothing but UT Law grads. That doesn't sound like they are trying to attract T14 grads to me.

Can you name some biglaw firms in TX that have nothing but UT Law grads? I can think of a lit boutique that draws most of their people from Harvard and UT (Gibbs & Bruns), but lit boutiques aren't the best thing to concentrate on for this comparison since not too many people from UT or T14 schools will get the option of going there after graduation. Most of the bigname firms in Dallas and Houston take on plenty of T14 people. Maybe firms more focused on just Texas like jackson walker, Thompson Knight, and Hayboo focus more on UT and other Texas schools, but I'm sure they have a sprinkling of T14 people too.

As for point about how firms may value UT students, you're right. But that still makes it completely rational for a TX person to go to somewhere like UVA, since there will be less competition for TX among classmates and he won't have to have as good of grades. I had a choice between UVA and UT, and I chose UT. I am very happy with my decision and how things worked out (especially the part about me having less debt at UT). If the decision was between UT and UVA at the same cost though (for a TX person wanting to work in TX after graduation), the rational decision would be to choose UVA, unless you have special circumstances about why living in Austin is so important.

BigZuck wrote:Can anyone speculate on what they think the dramatic cut in class size means for incoming UT students when it comes to biglaw hiring?

What I mean is: let's say for the sake of the argument that there used to be 400 UT students and 100 big law jobs. And again for the sake of the argument say that these 100 jobs were given to the top 100 kids in the class, so the top 25% (oversimplifications, I know, just bear with me).

Now, instead of there being 400 UT students there are 300. But there are still 100 big law jobs. Should we now assume that the top 33% of the class will get those jobs? Or, will firms hold tight to their (hypothetical) top 25% cut off and only 75 UT kids will get those jobs and the other 25 spots will be filled from other schools?

Hopefully that wasn't too confusing, I can try and clarify if need be. I'm just wondering if we should consider the cut in class size as removing the bottom of the class and it will be better for everyone or if the employment scores will roughly stay the same percentage wise (and yes I know what we are looking at on places like LST is from the worst year in recent history).

Don't get bogged down in this line of thinking. I doubt employers (firms, government agencies, public interest outfits) will lower their standards if the number of UT students shrinks. Put another way, if they don't like you, they won't hire you, regardless of how many classmates you have. Focus on your own prospects instead of a statistical hypothesis.

I'll bet you can count on a better chance at a good parking spot, though.

If you're saying you think that cut offs will remain the same then thanks, that's helpful. The other part of your response I'm a little leery of. I'm trying to avoid thinking that I am a special snowflake and figure out what my statistical chances are from each school I am applying to. Forgive me if I misinterpreted what you said and thanks for responding.

StylinNProfilin wrote:how are the employment prospects looking? Last number I saw was around 23% big law and 7% clerkships for the class of '11. Has this changed much for your class?

I'm hoping they'll look better, since the class of '11 had it pretty rough across the board. I can rely only on the vaguest anecdotal evidence (and I don't like to hang out with law students that much), but it seems like my class is doing OK. Most 3Ls I know on TLR and my journal seem to have hopped on the generic biglaw train, though my journal is known for being a biglaw feeder, especially for Texas firms. Maybe Richie knows more about the TLR folks. IP people and hard-core oil and gas people seem to be doing well. Public interest hopefuls are definitely having a difficult time, what with government freezes, foundation budgets shrinking, increased competition, and overall uncertainty about the legal market.

Any other 3Ls or 2Ls want to weigh in on the outlook for their respective classes?

Things were at the bottom for the class of '11. I know that hiring picked up for class of '12 and I think things picked up a little bit more for '13 (the class philosoraptor and me are in). I don't have anything but anecdotal evidence, but most people I know are doing biglaw (that's probably a non-representative sample size though). I do know a few 3Ls who currently have nothing lined up for after graduation though.